Bethlehem: Rachel's Tomb

Baroness Tonge: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What discussions they have held with the Israeli Government concerning the settlement around Rachel's Tomb near Bethlehem.

Lord Triesman: Bethlehem is of unique religious and cultural significance to Christians. We remain concerned about the current route of the barrier and settlement building around Bethlehem, and other parts of the West Bank.
	Settlements are illegal under international law and settlement construction is an obstacle to peace. The road map is clear that Israel should freeze all settlement construction including the "natural growth" of existing settlements, and dismantle all outposts built since 2001.
	We also fully recognise Israel's right to self-defence. A barrier is a reasonable way to achieve this. But the barrier's route should be on or behind the green line, and not on occupied territory. Construction of the barrier on Palestinian land is illegal. The route is particularly damaging around East Jerusalem, as it risks cutting the city off from the West Bank and dividing the West Bank in two.
	On 2 March, our ambassador in Tel Aviv discussed settlements, the barrier, and Israeli Acting Prime Minister Olmert's future plans for the West Bank with the Israeli Prime Minister's special adviser.

Bovine Tuberculosis

Baroness Byford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Mr Ben Bradshaw, on 9 February (Official Report, House of Commons, col. 1348W), what monitoring takes place to ensure that the tuberculin skin test for bovine tuberculosis continues to be effective; how the accuracy of the test is measured; what percentage accuracy is required for the test to be declared effective; and what percentage of test results are confirmed at slaughter.

Lord Bach: The single intradermal comparative cervical tuberculin (SICCT) test, commonly known as the tuberculin skin test, is a well established screening test for TB in cattle. It is approved and recognised by the EU Commission and the International Animal Health Organisation (OIE) as a primary, effective tool for the diagnosis of TB in cattle and other species, by virtue of its overall accuracy, robustness and relative simplicity (as demonstrated in several field evaluations conducted throughout the world).
	The accuracy of any test is measured in terms of its specificity (proportion of uninfected animals identified as negative) and its sensitivity (proportion of infected animals detected as positive). The specificity for a correctly performed SICCT is above 99 per cent. Its sensitivity is between 77 per cent and 95 per cent.
	The effectiveness of the tuberculin test depends on a host of controllable and uncontrollable variables such as the quality of the test reagent (tuberculins) employed, the operator performing the test, the animal/herd being tested, criteria for interpretation and the epidemiological situation. All batches of tuberculin undergo quality assurance testing at the Veterinary Laboratories Agency before release and their performance in the field is also monitored by epidemiological analyses. The quality of tuberculin testing work by approved local veterinary inspectors (LVIs) is assured by annual veterinary practice audits conducted by the State Veterinary Service (SVS), which ensure that LVIs are working to the most up to date operating procedures. The test certificates submitted by LVIs to the SVS are also audited for consistency with professional expectations. All concerns raised by farmers regarding the administration of the test are investigated by the SVS. A number of key TB epidemiological parameters (eg rate of reactors per 10,000 tests, disease confirmation rate in individual reactors, slaughterhouse case numbers, etc) are also centrally monitored as indirect indicators of the effectiveness of the tuberculin testing programme.
	Provisional statistics indicate that 33.6 per cent 1 of all skin test reactors slaughtered in 2005 had demonstrable signs of TB (visible lesions on post mortem examination or a positive culture result for mycobacterium bovis). The purpose of post mortem examination and bacteriological culture of tuberculin test reactors is not so much the validation of skin test results on individual animals, but rather to determine for epidemiological purposes, (a) the severity of disease in infected animals and (b) the strain of mycobacterium bovis organism involved. Failure to find evidence of the disease by these means in a test reactor does not mean that the animal was not infected. In the early stages of infection, it is not always possible to see TB lesions with the naked eye, and, due to the fastidious nature of the organism, it is not possible to culture it from samples in every case.
	1 Provisional data downloaded from the State Veterinary Service database on 7 March 2006. Subject to change as more data become available.

Community Foundation for Northern Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	To whom the Community Foundation for Northern Ireland has granted European funding since its creation; for what purpose; how much was granted; and whether they will place copies of all the applications in the Library of the House.

Lord Rooker: Details of European funding granted by the Community Foundation for Northern Ireland (CFNI), formerly known as the Northern Ireland Voluntary Trust, since its creation are as follows.
	
		
			 Programme Measure Amount Awarded £m Measure Title 
			 Peace I 3.4(a) 8.97 Cross-Border Community Reconciliation 
			  3.4(b) 0.38 Cross-Border Community Reconciliation 
			  4.1 13.31 Developing Grassroots Capacities and Promoting the Inclusion of Women 
			  4.4 0.48 Promoting the Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups and Improving the Accessibility and Quality of Services aimed at these groups 
			  4.6 3.14 Accompanying Infrastructure and Equipment Support 
			 
			 Northern Ireland Single Programme Document 2.1.3 3.98 Targeting Social Need 
			  2.1.5 2.81 Community Infrastructure 
			 Peace I (NIO) 4.4 7.13 Promoting the Inclusion of Vulnerable Groups and Improving the Accessibility and Quality of Services aimed at these groups 
			  4.6 3.35 Accompanying Infrastructure and Equipment Support 
			 Peace II 2.3 4.65 Skilling and Building the Social Economy 
			  2.4(a) 7.30 Pathways to Inclusion 
			 Peace II (OFMDFM) 2.4(b) 5.99 Integration and Reconciliation 
			  2.6 2.98 Promoting Active Citizenship 
			  2.7 5.36 Developing Weak Community Infrastructure 
			  2.8 5.36 Accompanying Infrastructure and Equipment Support 
			  5.3 8.57 Developing Cross-Border Reconciliation and Understanding 
			  5.4 10.22 Promoting Joint Approaches to Social Education Training and Human Resource Development 
		
	
	As in excess of 5,000 projects were funded by CFNI under these programmes, it is not possible to list all projects in this response. However, a list of the projects funded will be placed in the Library in due course. As applications average 50 pages, it is not possible to place a copy of each of the 5,000 applications in the Library due to the disproportionate cost.

Community Foundation for Northern Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Community Foundation for Northern Ireland has recently refused an application for funding from the Armagh-based victims' group Families Acting for Innocent Relatives (FAIR); if so, what decision was taken; and on what basis.

Lord Rooker: I confirm that the Community Foundation for Northern Ireland has recently refused two applications to the Peace II Programme from the Armagh-based victims' group Families Acting for Innocent Relatives (FAIR). The reason for the first decision was that the application did not score highly enough in the selection and approval process, while the second did not meet the Peace II distinctiveness criteria.

Immigration: IND Website

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the Home Office's Immigration and Nationality Directorate website has not been available for the provision of information, including the recent version of the Immigration Rules; how long the site has been unavailable; and when it will be corrected.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Since November 2005, hardware and software failures due to unseen increased demand have caused some delays to the Immigration and Nationality Directorate website. A significant amount of work is currently being undertaken to improve the service of website. The Home Office has approved the purchase of a new hardware platform and the implementation of a new site-management tool. The rollout of these technical solutions will noticeably improve the performance rate of the website. This is scheduled for completion by 15 April 2006. From the beginning of February 2006, the IND web team has posted a news story on the website to inform customers of on-going problems. This story will be regularly revised and remain until the problems are resolved.

Incapacity Benefit

Lord Carter: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many of the 976,000 people claiming non-contributing incapacity benefit in May 2005 had never worked.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: The information is not available. We do not have the necessary records of claimants' employment histories.

Inter Trade Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much InterTradeIreland has spent on recruitment advertisements in each year since its creation.

Lord Rooker: Details of expenditure by InterTradeIreland, the trade and business development body, on recruitment advertising are set out below.
	
		
			 Year Expenditure 
			 2000 £12,205 
			 2001 £32,023 
			 2002 £29,263 
			 2003 £22,259 
			 2004 £30,135 
			 2005 £35,219

Iraq

Lord Dykes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether United Kingdom forces in Iraq will enjoy adequate protection and safety from attack in view of indications of unrest among the Iraqi public due to foreign military personnel remaining longer than expected.

Lord Drayson: Force protection measures for British Forces are kept under constant review and additional protection is—and will continue to be—as the operational situation requires.

Israel and Palestine: Gaza

Baroness Tonge: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have made to the Israeli Government following the assassination of Muneer Mohammed Mohammed Sukka and one other adult and three children in Gaza City on 3 March.

Lord Triesman: Israel has the right to defend itself, but any actions it takes must be in accordance with international law and should be proportionate. We have repeatedly expressed our concern about Israel's policy on targeted killings, particularly our concerns about the number of civilian casualties. It is essential that Israel conducts itself in accordance with international law. International law requires that lethal force be used only where absolutely necessary in self-defence. We believe, however, that in many cases Israel's use of lethal force was not necessary. We have been particularly concerned that, in the course of Israel Defence Force operations, too little effort was made to avoid civilian casualties. We call on Israel to act with restraint and end its policy of targeted killings. Our ambassador in Tel Aviv last raised the deaths of Palestinian individuals as a result of Israeli Defence Force activities in the Occupied Territories with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on 30 January and our Defence Attaché raised this with the Israel Defence Force on 8 March.

Israel and Palestine: West Bank

Baroness Tonge: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What action they are taking to encourage the Israeli Government to stop the expansion of settlements in the West Bank.

Lord Triesman: We have continued to emphasise to the Israeli Government, both bilaterally and when as EU president, that settlement building is illegal under international law, threatens the territorial contiguity of any future Palestinian state and is an obstacle to peace. The road map, to which the Israeli Government remain committed, is clear that Israel should freeze all settlement construction including the "natural growth" of existing settlements and dismantle all outposts built since 2001.
	On 2 March, our ambassador in Tel Aviv raised settlements, the barrier and discussed Israeli acting Prime Minister Olmert's future plans for the West Bank with the Israeli Prime Minister's special adviser.

Kosovo

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How much progress has been made in developing civilian control over police, prison services and the Kosovo Protection Corps; and whether the United Nations Mission in Kosovo has now established effective Ministries of the Interior and of Justice.

Lord Triesman: The United Nations interim administration mission in Kosovo (UNMIK) has transferred all 33 Kosovo police stations and five out of six regional stations to Kosovo Police Service (KPS) control. Detention centres have been handed over to the Kosovo Correctional Service and two prisons have also been transferred to Kosovar management. The Kosovo Protection Corps (KPC) is a civilian emergency organisation tasked with providing humanitarian assistance to all communities of Kosovo. On 24 January 2006, UNMIK passed a regulation allowing the KPC to expand its humanitarian role in Kosovo and to professionalise and modernise through approved educational courses.
	In December 2005, UNMIK passed a regulation establishing new Ministries of Justice and the Interior. Ministers have now been appointed. The next stage is to give these Ministers legal, technical, financial and administrative responsibilities in relation to police and justice.

Kosovo

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What stage the Internal Security Sector Review, endorsed by the United Nations Special Representative in Kosovo, has now reached.

Lord Triesman: Stages one and two of the UN-led Internal Security Sector Review (ISSR), a mechanism designed to develop accountable and affordable internal security architecture for Kosovo, are now complete. These stages covered an evaluation of the security threats faced by Kosovo. Work on the next stage which involves conducting a functional review of Kosovo's provisional institutions of self-government is underway. At all stages of the process the ISSR Steering Committee, chaired by the UN Special Representative in Kosovo, will be informed and approve next steps. Martti Ahtisaari, the UN Status Envoy, continues to be briefed on the work of the ISSR which is an important element of the future status process.

Kosovo

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the survey of small arms in Kosovo, commissioned by the South Eastern Europe Clearing-house for the Control of Small Arms and Light Weapons, is expected to be complete; and whether the survey will be published.

Lord Triesman: This survey, covering the control of small arms in Kosovo, is due to be completed in May 2006. Following completion, a report on the survey will be published by the United Nation Development Programme.

Language Implementation Body

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the two agencies in the Language Implementation Body can spend money on activities outside the island of Ireland on an equal basis.

Lord Rooker: It is permissible for the Ulster-Scots Agency and Foras na Gaeilge to incur expenditure on activities outside the island of Ireland provided there is a direct, demonstrable and beneficial link between such expenditure and the respective statutory remits of each agency.

North/South Implementation Bodies

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What amendments have been made to the legislation setting up the cross-border implementation bodies; for what purposes; and when.

Lord Rooker: The North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (Northern Ireland) Order 1999 (S.I. 1999/859) which provided for the establishment of the North/South Implementation Bodies has been amended by the North/South Co-operation (Implementation Bodies) (Amendment) (Northern Ireland) Order 1999 (S.I. 1999/2062). This amendment gave effect to the supplementary agreement between the British and Irish Governments concerning the interpretation of certain terms in the international agreement establishing the implementation bodies done at Dublin on 8 March 1999 (the "Implementation Bodies Agreement").
	The supplementary agreement clarified that it was the joint intention of the two Governments that the terms "Community Initiatives", "Initiatives" and "CIs" in Part 4 of Annexe 1 and Part 4 of Annexe 2 to the Implementation Bodies Agreement (concerning the functions of the Special EU Programmes Body) would include any successor to the Peace programme.
	Also, while Section 1 of the Northern Ireland Act 2000 is in force, paragraph 10 of the Schedule to that Act provides that in the 1999 order any references to the Implementation Bodies Agreement, or to any provision of the agreement, are to be read in light of any "relevant agreements".
	There is currently one such relevant agreement—the Exchange of Notes between the British and Irish Governments of 19 November 2002. Consequently, while Section 1 of the Northern Ireland Act 2000 remains in force, the legislation establishing the implementation bodies has effect when read with this agreement.

Palestine: Prime Minister

Baroness Tonge: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What discussions they have held with the Israeli Government regarding the safety of the Palestinian Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh.

Lord Triesman: We have not discussed the safety of the Hamas Prime Minister, Ismail Haniyeh, with the Israeli Government.

Passports

Lord Stevens of Ludgate: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 13 March (WA 198), whether checking European Union and European Economic Association passports against the Immigration and Nationality Directorate database involves swiping them.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Unless local risk assessments indicate otherwise, all EU/EEA passports with a machine readable zone are swiped when checked against the IND database. Those EU/EEA passports which are non-machine readable have their details typed onto the IND database to be checked.

Planning

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the intention of the changes proposed in Annexe A of Planning Policy Statement 3 is to encourage the construction of housing developments on airfields and other recreational facilities.

Baroness Andrews: No. The proposed changes reflected in Annexe A of draft Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3), published for consultation in December 2005, were not intended to affect the application of the definition of previously developed land to former airfields. Specifically they do not seek to change policy in relation to the development of former airfield sites or recreational activities for housing or for any other purpose.
	The consultation period for responses to draft PPS3 closed on 27 February. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will take into account consultation responses on this matter in finalising PPS3.

Poverty

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In light of the findings of the Department for Work and Pensions report Making a Difference: Tackling Poverty—a progress report, what steps they are taking to ensure that they meet their next target of halving child poverty by 2010.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: Our long-term strategy to meet this target is set out in Opportunity for All and in the Child Poverty Review, published alongside the 2004 Spending Review White Paper. It is based on:
	work for those who can, helping parents participate in the labour market;
	financial support for families, with more support for those who need it most, when they need it most; and
	delivering excellent public services that improve poor children's life chances and help break cycles of deprivation.
	Our strategy has been successful in reversing the trend of rising child poverty and has resulted in 700,000 fewer children living in relative low income families. This represents significant progress towards the 2010 target to halve child poverty.
	We remain firmly committed to the challenging goals to halve and then eradicate child poverty. Our strategy for meeting the 2010 target consists of a further reinforcement of our labour market policies as set out in our recent Green Paper. We will complement this by increases in financial transfers through tax credits and further improvements in public services. We will also continue working across central government and with the devolved administrations, local government and the voluntary and community sector to ensure that progress is maintained.

Public Services: Northern Ireland

Lord Rana: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will outline the public services in Northern Ireland which could be delivered by private, community, voluntary and not-for-profit bodies.

Lord Rooker: There is scope, at an overall level, for the involvement of all such bodies in the delivery of efficient and effective public services, and in particular voluntary and community organisations, in view of the Government's commitment to support the development of a more wide-ranging involvement from that sector.
	The Government are currently reviewing the ways of delivering public services through the ongoing Northern Ireland Reform Programme and the Comprehensive Spending Review and will consider the potential role of the private, community, voluntary and not-for-profit sectors as part of the process.

Roads: A419 Blunsdon Bypass

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	In respect of the A419 Blunsdon bypass (a) what is the length of the bypass; (b) what was the estimated cost of the work in 2002, and what is the latest cost estimate; (c) what are the reasons for any increases in cost; and (d) what are the values of benefits to be gained by its construction.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The A419 Blunsdon Bypass is 3.5 kilometres (2 miles) in length. The estimated cost of the scheme in 2002 was £28.8 million. The latest approved scheme budget is £65.5 million.
	There are two main reasons for the increased forecast costs. First, the Highways Agency has improved the way that it develops TPI scheme budgets, based on Treasury guidance. This accounts for £11 million of the scheme cost increase. Since 2003, additional allowances have been included for assessed project risk, projected inflation at 2.5 per cent, and the recognised tendency in construction projects for budgets to be set too optimistically ("optimism bias"). That means that there are now better forecasts of the likely final costs of schemes. It also means that scheme costs pre-April 2003 are not directly comparable with costs post-April 2003, as they comprise different calculations of scheme cost. This new approach means that there is a better grip on likely final costs and the agency can act now to tackle potential cost increases rather than react afterwards when we get bigger bills.
	The targeted programme of improvements is subject to external cost pressures, including rising energy prices, that have driven cost inflation above the retail prices index in the construction industry.
	The remainder of the increase (£26 million) can be attributed to increases in the cost of construction and design fees, with the most significant element (£20 million) due to increased lands cost estimate.
	The Highways Agency is taking urgent measures to drive down costs and improve estimating and budgeting, including working closely with the supply chain. It is also taking a more realistic view of the final costs of projects.
	The scheme benefits include a reduction in congestion, long delays and accidents. There will also be environmental improvements for people living near the trunk road due to a reduction in the volume of traffic.
	The improvements will also make it easier for pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians to cross the road at Blunsdon. The benefit:cost ratio for the scheme is 4:2, which is categorised as high.

Roads: M11

Lord Hanningfield: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the estimated cost to the economy of the closure of the M11 on 25 and 26 February.

Lord Davies of Oldham: There is no definitive basis for a full survey of all costs likely to be material to this question.

Rural Payments Agency

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the administration of the single payment scheme delivery is satisfactory; and whether they will arrange for the Permanent Under-Secretary of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs to take personal responsibility for the Rural Payments Agency until any existing issues have been resolved.

Lord Bach: In respect of the administration of the single payment scheme, I refer to the Written Statement I made on 16 March (col. WS 101–02)
	As I said in the Statement, Mark Addison, former acting Defra Permanent Secretary, has been appointed as acting chief executive to provide stronger leadership to the Rural Payments Agency.
	Helen Ghosh, Permanent Secretary of my department, will continue to take a close personal interest in the delivery of the SPS, including through her chairing of both the RPA Ownership Board (which provides strategic direction and oversight of the agency) and the executive review group which approves all key strategic and operational decisions related to the SPS.

Schools: Northern Ireland

Lord Maginnis of Drumglass: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in the draft Education (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, they took into account the Northern Ireland Department of Education's recommendation that there should not be a right of appeal on suspensions in schools; and
	Whether, in the draft Education (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, their decision to allow a right of appeal on suspensions in schools was evaluated for its likely impact on schools' budgets; if so, what was the outcome of that evaluation; and whether the Northern Ireland Department of Education will carry the cost of any such appeals; and
	Whether, in the draft Education (Northern Ireland) Order 2006, their decision to allow a right of appeal on suspensions in schools may lead to routine police involvement in schools in serious disciplinary matters; and, if so, who will carry the costs arising.

Lord Rooker: The draft Education (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 contains an enabling power to introduce a formal suspension appeal system under such arrangements as the Department of Education may determine. The decision to include this provision follows from the recommendations of the Suspension and Expulsions Working Group after its consideration of the responses to the consultation document, issued in March 2004, which set out proposals for change.

Scrapie

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What have been the total costs, including the set-up cost and running costs, of the National Scrapie Plan since its inception; how many full-time posts are involved; and in which tasks.

Lord Bach: The total cost of the National Scrapie Plan (NSP) since its inception in 2001 until the end of February 2006 is approximately £97 million. This figure is inclusive of set-up and running costs.
	Currently, there are 84 full-time staff engaged on NSP activities. This includes staff at the State Veterinary Service's (SVS) National Scrapie Plan Administration Centre, who are responsible for service delivery aspects, and core Defra staff responsible for the NSP policy and programme management in partnership with the GB devolved administrations. In addition, farm-based activities are carried out by SVS field staff and local veterinary inspectors alongside their other duties.

Scrapie

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many cases of (a) classical, and (b) atypical scrapie have been detected in sheep in the United Kingdom since the introduction of the National Scrapie Plan; what were the genotypes of the sheep; and which strains of scrapie were found.

Lord Bach: In the UK there are two forms of surveillance performed for the detection of TSEs in sheep, termed passive and active surveillance. Passive surveillance is where animals are reported to the State Veterinary Service (SVS) with clinical signs of disease, and the case is investigated. In 2002 the European Union launched a Europe-wide active TSE surveillance programme to establish the prevalence of TSEs in small ruminants. This has required the testing of sheep slaughtered for human consumption and fallen sheep over 18 months of age.
	Table 1 shows the number of classical cases of scrapie detected in Great Britain through the passive surveillance from the beginning of the National Scrapie Plan in July 2001 until 15 March 2006. Diagnostic methods capable of detecting atypical cases of scrapie were introduced into the passive surveillance programme in July 2004, so the data presented for atypical cases of scrapie in the table are from July 2004 to 15 March 2006.
	
		
			 Genotype Classical Scrapie Atypical Scrapie 
			 Unknown 152 0 
			 ARR/ARR 0 0 
			 ARR/AHQ 0 1 
			 ARR/ARQ 3 0 
			 ARR/ARH 0 0 
			 AHQ/AHQ 8 0 
			 AHQ/ARH 0 0 
			 ARQ/ARH 25 0 
			 ARH/ARH 13 0 
			 AHQ/ARQ 26 2 
			 ARQ/ARQ 289 0 
			 ARR/VRQ 59 0 
			 AHQNRQ 2 0 
			 ARH/VRQ 68 0 
			 ARQIVRQ 664 0 
			 VRQ/VRQ 203 0 
			 Total 1,512 3 
		
	
	Table 2 shows the number of confirmed classical and atypical scrapie cases detected in Great Britain through active surveillance of sheep at abattoirs and fallen stock since testing began in January 2002 until 15 March 2006. The active surveillance programme is an EU requirement. From January 2002 the Veterinary Laboratories Agency has tested over 140,000 sheep samples.
	
		
			 Genotype Classical Scrape Atypical Scrape 
			 Unknown 1 0 
			 ARR/ARR 0 15 
			 ARR/AHQ 0 29 
			 ARR/ARQ 1 13 
			 ARR/ARH 0 1 
			 AHQ/AHQ 1 13 
			 AHQ/ARH 0 2 
			 ARQ/ARH 1 0 
			 ARH/ARH 0 0 
			 AHQ/ARQ 3 21 
			 ARQ/ARQ 23 13 
			 ARR/VRQ 32 0 
			 AHQ/VRQ 0 0 
			 ARH/VRQ 12 0 
			 ARQNRQ 76 1 
			 VRQ/VRQ 15 0 
			 Total 165 108 
		
	
	Information on the strains of scrapie present in a sample is not routinely collected.

Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee

The Countess of Mar: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What have been the total funds allocated by them and by the research councils for research into transmissible spongiform encephalopathies in sheep, goats and cattle since the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee was formed; and to which individuals or organisations those funds have been allocated.

Lord Bach: The main funders of research into transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (TSEs) in sheep, goats and cattle are MAFF/Defra, the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) and the Food Standards Agency (FSA).
	MAFF/DEFRA
	Since the Spongiform Encephalopathy Advisory Committee (SEAC) was formed in 1990, MAFF/Defra have funded or are currently funding 274 research projects in TSEs at a total cost of £182,600,992. The breakdown of MAFF/Defra funding per institution is as follows.
	
		
			 Institute Total funding 
			 Veterinary Laboratory Agency £112,971,955 
			 Institute for Animal Health £33,334,551 
			 Moredun Research Institute £11,204,753 
			 ADAS Consulting Ltd £7,867,858 
			 Scottish Agricultural College £2,951,169 
			 University of California, USA £1,723,693 
			 University of Cambridge £1,513,335 
			 Roslin Institute £1,347,260 
			 Institute of Grassland and Environment Research £1,206,740 
			 Central Science Laboratory £1,028,421 
			 Institute of Neuropathology, Zurich, Switzerland £824,232 
			 Central Institute for Animal Diseases Control, TheNetherlands £719,526 
			 University of Reading £536,812 
			 University of Edinburgh £464,272 
			 Risk Solutions £455,537 
			 Centre for Applied Microbiology and Research £404,561 
			 University of Warwick £403,735 
			 University College London £377,968 
			 Adlyfe Inc., USA £348,995 
			 University of Bristol £293,812 
			 Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique,France £280,830 
			 Silsoe Research Institute £274,671 
			 University of Oxford £270,282 
			 Queens University Belfast £249,573 
			 University of Bath £231,952 
			 Institute of Zoology £194,479 
			 University of Birmingham £192,050 
			 Wye College, Imperial College London £147,718 
			 University of Liverpool £147,537 
			 Commissariat à l'Energie Atomique, France £136,700 
			 National Institute for Biological Standards andControl £131,068 
			 Federal Research Centre for Virus Diseases ofAnimals. Germany £117,069 
			 Leatherhead Food International Ltd £92,494 
			 DNV (Det Norske Veritas) Cranfield University £42,246 
			 Rare Breeds Survival Trust £32,794 
			 Harper Adams Agricultural College £31,750 
			 University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Institute of RuralStudies £26,048 
			 Animal Health Trust £5,384 
		
	
	The total includes predicted funding for the remaining years of ongoing projects.
	Where a project has joint contractors and/or sub-contractors the total amount is allocated to the largest/main contractor.
	Although the vast majority of this research is aimed directly at TSEs in cattle, sheep and goats, a small proportion arguably falls outside this definition.
	FSA
	Since its foundation in 2000 the Food Standards Agency has funded or is currently funding 41 projects in the area of TSEs at a total cost of £21,984,659. The breakdown of FSA funding per institution is as follows.
	
		
			 Institute  
			 Veterinary Laboratory Agency £17,841,183 
			 University of Bristol £1,022,088 
			 Imperial College London £590,953 
			 Silsoe Research Institute £584,039 
			 Roslin Institute £541,160 
			 Central Science laboratory £517,256 
			 Institute of Grassland and Environment Research £408,865 
			 DNV (Det Norske Veritas) £312,000 
			 University of Oxford £95,283 
			 Risk Solutions £47,743 
			 Meat and Livestock Commission £24,089 
		
	
	Please note that the figures include predicted funding for the remaining years of ongoing projects.
	BBSRC
	Since SEAC was formed in 1990, BBSRC has funded research projects on TSEs at a total value of £58 million.
	The breakdown of BBSRC funding per institution from 1997–98 onwards is as follows (a total of 227 research grants, BBSRC-sponsored institute projects and research studentships).
	
		
			 Institution Total 
			 Institute for Animal Health (IAH) £20,655,211 
			 University of Edinburgh £2,997,052 
			 University of Cambridge £2,832,572 
			 University of Oxford £1,240,426 
			 University of Kent £1,160,565 
			 Roslin Institute (RI) £937,841 
			 Imperial College London £887,552 
			 University College London £877,030 
			 Queen Mary, University of London £788,264 
			 Kings College London £741,089 
			 National Institute for Medical Research £513,750 
			 University of Bath £434,536 
			 University of Warwick £328,886 
			 University of Nottingham £313,625 
			 GKT School of Medicine (Guys Campus) £292,715 
			 University of Birmingham £245,520 
			 Cardiff University £241,295 
			 The University of Manchester £237,886 
			 University of Southampton £183,666 
			 University of Leicester £183,412 
			 University of Leeds £177,116 
			 University of Sussex £160,823 
			 Institute of Cancer Research £148,997 
			 University of Bristol £148,200 
			 University of Sheffield £40,590 
			 University of Aberdeen £32,800 
			 Institute of Food Research (IFR) E1,932 
			 Grand Total £36,803,351 
		
	
	Figures have been provided from 1997–98 onwards only. To retrieve information for earlier years than this would incur disproportionate costs.
	The above totals relate to BBSRC spend on TSE research which in the main, directly relates to TSE research in sheep, cattle and goats. However, a small proportion of BBSRC funded research relates to underpinning research on yeast prions in addition to research on Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease in humans. This research has none the less been included in the totals as it is considered that such research may further underpin our understanding of TSEs in sheep, cattle and goats.
	For ongoing research grants and studentships, the totals include predicted spend for the remainder of the project. For core strategic grant funding at BBSRC-sponsored institutes, the totals include predicted spend for 2005–06 only, although a number of the projects are likely to continue further into the future.

Sudan

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are supporting and giving technical help to the peace negotiations on eastern Sudan, begun in Tripoli on 7 February.

Lord Triesman: The government of Sudan and the Eastern Front, the main opposition group in eastern Sudan, were scheduled to begin negotiations in Sirte, Libya, on 7 February 2006. Ahead of this the UK provided funding to a UK-based non-governmental organisation, Concordis, to provide technical training to the Eastern Front to prepare for the talks.
	On 6 February, the Eastern Front announced that it would not participate in the proposed talks in Libya. The Eastern Front is currently holding internal discussions on its position. We are in regular contact with the Eastern Front and the government of Sudan and are pressing both parties to begin negotiations at the earliest possible opportunity. We have offered our assistance in finding a suitable venue and mediator for the talks.

Sudan

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Sudan People's Liberation Movement (Armed Wing) has withdrawn its forces from eastern Sudan, in accordance with the comprehensive peace agreement.

Lord Triesman: Under the terms of the comprehensive peace agreement (CPA), the Sudan People's Liberation Movement/Army was scheduled to withdraw its forces from eastern Sudan by 9 January 2006. The parties to the CPA agreed an extension to this deadline until May 2006 through the appropriate body under the CPA, the joint military committee.

Sudan

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have made representations to the government of Sudan that a substantial part of their oil revenue should be devoted to providing basic facilities in the war-damaged areas of southern Sudan.

Lord Triesman: The comprehensive peace agreement (CPA), signed on 9 January 2005, stipulates that southern Sudan shall be brought up to the same level of socio-economic and public services as the northern states. Under the CPA, revenue from oil produced in southern Sudan should be shared equally between the national government and the government of South Sudan, with a contribution going to the oil producing state. The CPA also states that the framework for sharing oil wealth should,
	"balance the need for national development and reconstruction of Southern Sudan".
	The UK is providing support to the National Petroleum Commission, which is tasked with overseeing the implementation and distribution of oil wealth.

Tourism: Northern Ireland

Lord Rana: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they have taken to promote Northern Ireland as a tourism destination in India and China.

Lord Rooker: Tourism Ireland, the organisation responsible for marketing the island of Ireland overseas, actively seeks to develop markets such as India and China, which have potential for Northern Ireland tourism.
	To date, the company has established marketing representatives in both Mumbai and Shanghai, who are tasked with identifying the best prospect segments and increasing the awareness in these markets of the island of Ireland as a premier holiday destination.
	In both India and China, Tourism Ireland undertakes a range of marketing activities, including:
	encouraging tour operators and travel agents and key media representatives to visit Northern Ireland and see the tourism product at first hand;
	working closely with carriers and tour operators and undertaking joint consumer promotions to promote the island of Ireland; and
	participating in key trade and consumer events to showcase the tourism product.

Tourism: Northern Ireland

Lord Rana: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What budget they have made available to Tourism Ireland for the promotion of Northern Ireland in India over the next 12 months.

Lord Rooker: Tourism Ireland has allocated a budget of £86,250 during 2006 to market the island of Ireland in India.

Waterways Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What salary increases have been awarded to the directors of Waterways Ireland since its creation; and on what bases the awards were made.

Lord Rooker: Directors at Waterways Ireland have received salary increases in line with other employees of the body employed in the same jurisdiction. The increases were made up of two elements; (a) an annual increment on their salary scale, and (b) general increases which are applied to Waterways Ireland staff based in Northern Ireland.
	All general increases were approved by the North/South Ministerial Council.

Waterways Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Rooker on 1 March (WA 83) about Waterways Ireland quotations for the bulk purchase of chocolates for staff, whether they will place in the Library of the House copies of all the related letters and documentation.

Lord Rooker: Arrangements will be made to place the relevant documents in the Library.

Waterways Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What work in relation to Waterways Ireland's risk assessment and risk register and the organisation's customer care training programme Deloitte and Touche and PSM consultants have undertaken respectively; how much each of the companies has been paid for the work; and when.

Lord Rooker: Both the Waterways Ireland risk register and the report completed for the organisation by PSM, which are available in the Library, detail the work undertaken by each company.
	Deloitte and Touche were paid €5,253 in 2004, €15,626 in 2005 and €4,797 in 2006.
	PSM were paid €25,277 in 2004 and €69,542 in 2005.

Waterways Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why, in the light of the findings of the investigation regarding the senior appointments and bullying which had already been reported, the chief executive of Waterways Ireland received a pay increase of almost £16,000 in line with a decision of the North/South Ministerial Council on 8 March 2005; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Rooker on 1 March (WA 84) concerning Waterways Ireland, why the Written Answer of 20 December 2005 (WA 295) stated that the chief executive of Waterways Ireland had not received any performance-based or related pay increases.

Lord Rooker: I refer the noble Lord to my Answer of 1 March 2006 (Official Report, col. WA 84). The pay increases with effect from 1 April 2003 and 1 April 2004 for the chief executive had not been actioned by Waterways Ireland when I gave my earlier Answer on 20 December 2005 (Official Report, col. WA 294).

Waterways Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answers by the Lord Rooker on 1 March (WA 82), 18 January (WA 124) and 6 December 2005 (WA 98) concerning Waterways Ireland, why the bulk purchase of chocolates in Waterways Ireland was not recorded in the minutes of the senior management group meetings as indicated in the Answers; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Rooker on 1 March (WA 83) concerning Waterways Ireland, why quotations were sought by Waterways Ireland for the bulk purchase of chocolates on 3 December 2002, when the minutes of the senior management group meetings show no approval for such purchase was given on or before that date; and
	Further to the Written Answers by the Lord Rooker on 18 January (WA 124) and 1 March (WA 82) concerning Waterways Ireland, why quotations were sought by Waterways Ireland for the bulk purchase of chocolates on 4 December 2003 when consideration of and approval for such a purchase had not been given by the senior management group on 4 December 2003 as indicated in the Answer.

Lord Rooker: I understand that Waterways Ireland does not consider that the purchase of chocolates for staff is a matter at a level requiring further approval by the senior management group.

Waterways Ireland

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Rooker on 18 January (WA 123), from whom the quotation was sought on 4 December 2003 for the bulk purchase of chocolates by Waterways Ireland.

Lord Rooker: I understand from Waterways Ireland that quotations were sought from Fosters Chocolates, Portadown; from Holmes Cash and Carry, Enniskillen and from Safeway's Supermarket, Enniskillen.
	Quotations were received from Fosters Chocolates and from Holmes Cash and Carry. The contract was awarded to Fosters as it was the most economically advantageous.